OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: C. Martijn de Sterke
  • Vol. 19, Iss. 13 — Jun. 20, 2011
  • pp: 12342–12347
« Show journal navigation

Superfocusing of electric or magnetic fields using conical metal tips: effect of mode symmetry on the plasmon excitation method

Jae Sung Lee, Sanghoon Han, Javid Shirdel, Sukmo Koo, Diyar Sadiq, Christoph Lienau, and Namkyoo Park  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 19, Issue 13, pp. 12342-12347 (2011)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.19.012342


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (1090 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

We compare single- and double-sided excitation methods of adiabatic surface plasmon polariton (SPP) wave superfocusing for scattering-type metallic near-field scanning optical microscopy (s-NSOM). Using the results of full 3D finite difference time domain analyses, the differences in field enhancement factors are explained and reveal the mode selectivity of a conical NSOM tip for adiabatic SPP superfocusing. Exploiting the mode-symmetric nature of the tip further, we also show that it is possible to selectively confine either the electric or magnetic field at the NSOM tip apex, by simply adjusting the relative phase between the SPP waves in the double-sided excitation approach.

© 2011 OSA

1. Introduction

Utilizing the nano-focused near-fields at the apex of a sharp-tip probe, near-field scanning optical microscopy (NSOM) offers a path to break the classical diffraction limit of light, and to experimentally realize subwavelength interrogation of individual nano-objects [1

1. B. Hecht, B. Sick, U. P. Wild, V. Deckert, R. Zenobi, O. J. F. Martin, and D. W. Pohl, “Scanning near-field optical microscopy with aperture probes: Fundamentals and applications,” J. Chem. Phys. 112(18), 7761–7774 (2000). [CrossRef]

-2

2. L. Novotny and S. J. Stranick, “Near-field optical microscopy and spectroscopy with pointed probes,” Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 57(1), 303–331 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The first version of NSOM probes were constructed with a small aperture at the apex of a typically conical, metal-coated dielectric waveguide. With the limited resolution for aperture probes - given by the finite minimum thickness (skin depth) required for the metal coating [3

3. Y. Inouye, “Apertureless metallic probes for near-field microscopy,” Top. Appl. Phys. 81, 29–48 (2001). [CrossRef]

,4

4. J. P. Fillard, Near Field Optics and Nanoscopy (World Scientific, Singapore, 1996).

] - there have been continuous efforts to increase the performance of NSOM; for example by utilizing the focusing of surface plasmon polaritons (SPP) in tetrahedral [5

5. J. Koglin, U. C. Fischer, and H. Fuchs, “Material contrast in scanning near-field optical microscopy at 1-10 nm resolution,” Phys. Rev. B 55(12), 7977–7984 (1997). [CrossRef]

], metal-coated dielectric- [6

6. M. Ashino and M. Ohtsu, “Fabrication and evaluation of a localized plasmon resonance probe for near-field optical microscopy/spectroscopy,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 72(11), 1299–1301 (1998). [CrossRef]

11

11. V. Lotito, U. Sennhauser, and C. Hafner, “Effects of asymmetric surface corrugations on fully metal-coated scanning near field optical microscopy tips,” Opt. Express 18(8), 8722–8734 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] or metal- [12

12. C. Ropers, C. C. Neacsu, T. Elsaesser, M. Albrecht, M. B. Raschke, and C. Lienau, “Grating-coupling of surface plasmons onto metallic tips: a nanoconfined light source,” Nano Lett. 7(9), 2784–2788 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

20

20. C. Ropers, D. R. Solli, C. P. Schulz, C. Lienau, and T. Elsaesser, “Localized multiphoton emission of femtosecond electron pulses from metal nanotips,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98(4), 043907 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] tip structures in an aperture-less configuration. Plasmon focusing can be achieved using SPP excitation by light illumination on the tip apex [18

18. A. L. Demming, F. Festy, and D. Richards, “Plasmon resonances on metal tips: understanding tip-enhanced Raman scattering,” J. Chem. Phys. 122(18), 184716 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

20

20. C. Ropers, D. R. Solli, C. P. Schulz, C. Lienau, and T. Elsaesser, “Localized multiphoton emission of femtosecond electron pulses from metal nanotips,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98(4), 043907 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] or on the shaft with metal grooves [12

12. C. Ropers, C. C. Neacsu, T. Elsaesser, M. Albrecht, M. B. Raschke, and C. Lienau, “Grating-coupling of surface plasmons onto metallic tips: a nanoconfined light source,” Nano Lett. 7(9), 2784–2788 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

15

15. F. I. Baida and A. Belkhir, “Superfocusing and light confinement by surface plasmon excitation through radially polarized beam,” Plasmonics 4(1), 51–59 (2009). [CrossRef]

], or using internal SPP excitations for the metal coated tip [7

7. L. Vaccaro, L. Aeschimann, U. Staufer, H. P. Herzig, and R. Dändliker, “Propagation of the electromagnetic field in fully coated near-field optical probes,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 83(3), 584–586 (2003). [CrossRef]

11

11. V. Lotito, U. Sennhauser, and C. Hafner, “Effects of asymmetric surface corrugations on fully metal-coated scanning near field optical microscopy tips,” Opt. Express 18(8), 8722–8734 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

].

In this paper, we investigate the effect of mode symmetry in the SPP excitation process on the efficiency of the field enhancement in adiabatic superfocusing (Fig. 1
Fig. 1 SPP excitation methods for adiabatic superfocusing at the metal NSOM tip apex compared in the present study. (a) single-sided, (b) double-sided E-symmetric (E field in-phase, H field out-of-phase), and (c) double-sided E-antisymmetric (E field out-of phase, H field in-phase) excitation.
). Interpreting the NSOM tip as a symmetric mode combiner, we then reveal and explain the differences in the field enhancement between: 1) single-sided-, 2) double-sided E-symmetric (E in-phase, H out-of-phase), and 3) double-sided H-symmetric (E out-of-phase, H in-phase) SPP excitation with linearly polarized lights. Our results show that it is possible to selectively enhance either the electric or the magnetic field at the tip apex. Switching between E- and H-field is simply achieved by controlling the relative phase between the incident waves in a double-sided excitation scheme. Excellent field enhancement up to |Eapex|2 / |Einc|2 = 145.6 for the double-sided E-symmetric excitation, and μ|H|2/ε|E|2 ~11 for the double-sided E-antisymmetric (or H-symmetric) excitation were achieved for the NSOM tip geometry used in the study.

2. Settings for the analysis

Due to the large computational space required to run full 3D FDTD calculations for adiabatic superfocusing (physical domain of 12 x 14 x 18 µm3 meshed into 752 x 1,078 x 756 computational grids), spatially varying grid sizes are used with a minimum grid size of 0.625 nm. The structure of the metal tip used in the simulations is shown in Fig. 1. A conical gold tip with an opening angle of 30° was considered, to get the maximum field enhancement at the apex [17

17. D. K. Gramotnev, M. W. Vogel, and M. I. Stockman, “Optimized nonadiabatic nanofocusing of plasmons by tapered metal rods,’,” J. Appl. Phys. 104(3), 034311 (2008). [CrossRef]

]. The radius of curvature at the apex was set to 40 nm. The dielectric function of gold around the wavelength of interest (780 nm) in the study was accounted for by using the Drude model (ε = εinfωp 2/ω(ω + ), ωp = 13.666x1015 rad/s, γ = 40.715x1012 rad/s, and εinf = 1.0) [19

19. R. M. Roth, N. C. Panoiu, M. M. Adams, R. M. Osgood Jr, C. C. Neacsu, and M. B. Raschke, “Resonant-plasmon field enhancement from asymmetrically illuminated conical metallic-probe tips,” Opt. Express 14(7), 2921–2931 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Seven rectangular grooves with a period of 706 nm and depth of 100 nm were engraved on the shaft of the cone in an axisymmetric manner, to match the phase of the incident light to that of SPP on the metal surface [24

24. S. A. Maier, Plasmonics: Fundamentals and Applications (Springer, 2007).

]. The axial distance between the apex and the first groove was set to 4 µm in order to isolate the SPP focused field at the tip apex from the direct contribution of the incident free-space wave. SPP excitation was achieved using a pulse with a Gaussian spectral profile, centered at a wavelength of 780 nm. To note, the spectral width of the pulse, 206 nm (full-width-at-half-maximum, FWHM), was twice as broad as the SPP-coupling wavelength window of grooves (SPP excitation dropping about 10%, at 780 +/− 20 nm). Incident normal to the shaft of the probe, the pulse is focused to a Gaussian spot on the shaft, with a spatial FWHM of 3.12 µm.

As shown in Fig. 1, three different SPP excitation schemes were considered: single-sided, double-sided E-symmetric and double-sided E-antisymmetric. For single-sided excitation, the cone shaft was illuminated from the bottom of the shaft with linearly p-polarized light. For double-sided E-symmetric and E-antisymmetric excitation, the structure is illuminated from the top and bottom of the shaft with two pulses of the same power as that of single-sided excitation. For each excitation scheme, the time-averaged value of the superfocused field intensity |Eapex|2 or |Hapex|2 at the apex was measured at a plane located 10 nm away from the apex, and was normalized to the intensity |Einc|2 of the incident light.

3. Results

Figure 2a-c
Fig. 2 (a~c) Normalized electric field intensity (|E|2/|Einc|2) distribution at λ = 780 nm, in the plane 10nm away from the tip apex. The overlaid graph shows the spatial distribution of the normalized intensity along the centerline of the figure. (d~f) Normalized SPP field (E Z/|Einc|) evolution near the NSOM tip end; for (a) and (d) single-sided, (b) and (e) double-sided E-symmetric, and (c) and (f) double-sided E- antisymmetric SPP excitation methods.
show the FDTD calculated E-field enhancement factors for different nonlocal SPP excitation schemes. Large enhancement factors |Eapex|2 / |Einc|2 for E-field, of 36.8 and 145.6 were observed at the design wavelength of 780 nm, for the single-sided (Fig. 2a) and double-sided E-symmetric (Fig. 2b) excitation configurations respectively. For the double-sided E-antisymmetric excitation method (Fig. 2c), superfocusing of SPP was suppressed by destructive interference, resulting in |Ez, apex|2 / |Einc|2 of 0.016 (|Ey, apex|2 / |Einc|2 = 0.281). Interesting to note is the factor of ~3.96 ( = 145.6/36.8) differences in the field enhancement at the tip apex between single sided vs. double sided E-symmetric excitation methods, while the total incident power differs by a factor of ~2 only. Interpreting the conical metal tip as a local SPP mode combiner and filter, these differences in the E-field enhancement are readily explained. As shown in Fig. 2e and Fig. 2f, the conical tip allows (or suppresses) the superfocusing of SPP for the E-symmetric (or E-antisymmetric) excitations, functioning as a symmetric, mode selective combiner. When both fields are in phase (E-symmetric, Etotal (Ebottom, Etop) = E(1, 1), see Fig. 1b) constructive interference results in enhancement of the E-field at the tip apex. In contrast, with the relative phase π between two fields (E-antisymmetric, E(1,-1), Fig. 1c) the E-field at the apex is suppressed. Now, for the case of single-sided excitation, decomposing its field into the sum of even- and odd- mode excitation (E(1, 0) = E(1/2, 1/2) + E(1/2, −1/2)), we obtain the field intensity of 1/2 ( = (1/2)2 + (1/2)2) at the tip apex from the odd-mode rejecting, symmetrical tip geometry. Comparing to the case of double-sided E-symmetric excitation (E(1, 1)) for which we retain the full field intensity of 2 ( = 12 + 12) at the even-mode tip apex, we obtain a factor-of-4 difference in the field intensity |Eapex|2 between two cases - in agreement with the FDTD obtained value of 3.96.

Considering the increasing attention for optical magnetism and H-field focusing [25

25. S. Koo, M. S. Kumar, J. Shin, D. S. Kim, and N. K. Park, “Extraordinary magnetic field enhancement with metallic nanowire: role of surface impedance in Babinet’s principle for sub-skin-depth regime,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 103(26), 263901 (2009). [CrossRef]

27

27. I. V. Shadrivov, A. B. Kozyrev, D. W. van der Weide, and Y. S. Kivshar, “Nonlinear magnetic metamaterials,” Opt. Express 16(25), 20266–20271 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], it is also worth to investigate the behavior of H-field intensity |H|2 at the tip apex. For this, we focus our attention to the symmetries of the H-field. Given the k vectors of the incident wave pointing toward the tip axis (Fig. 1), the symmetry of the incident H-field has the opposite parity compared to that of E-field, resulting in complementary behavior in their mode-combining effects. In line with the mode symmetry interpretation, now for H-field, field enhancement factors |Hapex|2 / |Hinc|2 of 0.794 and 3.263 were found for single-sided and double-sided E-antisymmetric (or H-symmetric) excitations, respectively. This is in sharp contrast to the total suppression of the H-field (|Hapex|2 / |Hinc|2 = 0.004) for the E-symmetric (or H-antisymmetric) SPP excitation case (Fig. 3
Fig. 3 (a~c) Normalized magnetic field intensity (|H|2/|Hinc|2) distribution at λ = 780 nm, in the plane, 10 nm away from the tip apex. The overlaid graph shows the spatial distribution of the normalized intensity along the centerline of the figure. (d~f) Normalized SPP field (H X/|Hinc|) evolution near the NSOM tip end; for (a) and (d) single-sided, (b) and (e) double-sided H-antisymmetric, and (c) and (f) double-sided H-symmetric SPP excitation methods. The white arrows show the direction of the magnetic field.
). Even though a strong net enhancement for H-field at the tip apex is not possible due to the azimuthal Hφ nature of the SPP mode [15

15. F. I. Baida and A. Belkhir, “Superfocusing and light confinement by surface plasmon excitation through radially polarized beam,” Plasmonics 4(1), 51–59 (2009). [CrossRef]

], the simultaneous suppression of E-field resulting from the aforementioned parity reversal in the E- and H-field symmetries is noteworthy. Compared to the NSOM tip design dedicated for H-field superfocusing (H Z, μ|H|2/ε|E|2 ~6) [26

26. T. J. Antosiewicz, P. Wróbel, and T. Szoplik, “Magnetic field concentrator for probing optical magnetic metamaterials,” Opt. Express 18(25), 25906–25911 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], our double-sided, H-symmetric SPP excitation method thus provides comparable H-field isolation (H X, μ|H|2/ε|E|2 ~11) without the need of changing the NSOM tip geometry. As is evident from Fig. 3, the H-field at the tip apex in the double-sided H-symmetric excitation scheme is only weakly spatially localized. Stronger H-field localization may be achieved by using more sophisticated taper geometries, for example using structures which allow circulation of current near the tip apex.

It seems worthwhile to compare these results concerning the excitation mode symmetry to the alternative, most commonly used method for NSOM tip excitation, utilizing a direct illumination of the tip apex [2

2. L. Novotny and S. J. Stranick, “Near-field optical microscopy and spectroscopy with pointed probes,” Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 57(1), 303–331 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,19

19. R. M. Roth, N. C. Panoiu, M. M. Adams, R. M. Osgood Jr, C. C. Neacsu, and M. B. Raschke, “Resonant-plasmon field enhancement from asymmetrically illuminated conical metallic-probe tips,” Opt. Express 14(7), 2921–2931 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. As shown in Fig. 4
Fig. 4 Normalized field intensity distribution for E- (upper row) and H- (lower row) field: I. Case of direct illumination method with (column 1: a,e) double-sided E-symmetric SPP excitation and (column 2: b,f) E-antisymmetric SPP excitation. II. Case of nonlocal illumination method with (column 3: c,g) double-sided E-symmetric SPP excitation and (column 4: d,h) double-sided E-antisymmetric SPP excitation. λ = 780 nm. Insets show the zoomed-in field image near the tip apex. Media 1, Media 2, Media 3, and Media 4 are provided for c, g, d, h, respectively.
, the selective enhancement of E - or H - field with E-symmetric / E-antisymmetric excitations are evident for both illumination methods. For direct illumination, |Eapex|2 / |Einc|2 of 4.36 and 17.27 were observed (at 780 nm) for the single-sided (not shown) and double-sided E-symmetric (Fig. 4a) excitations, respectively. Their difference by a factor of 3.96 can again be explained in terms of the mode symmetry. Compared to a nonlocal illumination on the tip shaft groove, much smaller field enhancement was found for direct illumination, due to the smaller flux-acceptance area near the tip apex. The calculated superfocusing efficiency for direct illumination was 0.35~0.61% of the incident light, compared to the efficiency of 2.5~4.8% for nonlocal illumination, depending on the excitation method (single-, double-sided) under the given NSOM geometry. To note, for the H-symmetric excitation, with the rather substantial far-field background noise from the incident wave it was hard to estimate the net effect of the SPP superfocusing.

Finally, understanding that E-symmetric or H-symmetric double sided SPP excitation can be achieved by providing proper phase differences between the two incident waves, we report the behavior of the field enhancement of E and H, as a function of the relative phase differences δϕ = (ϕ topϕ bottom). Figure 5a
Fig. 5 (a) Field enhancement factors at the center of the detection plane (10 nm away from the tip apex), as a function of δϕ ( = ϕ top - ϕ bottom, relative phase between top / bottom SPP excitation waves. λ = 780 nm). Plot of μ|H|2/ε|E|2 for δϕ = π (E-antisymmetric) excitation, in the (b) detection plane, and (c) x = 0 plane. The dotted lines show the μ|H|2/ε|E|2 = 1 contours forδϕ = π (white) and δϕ = 39π/40 (black), respectively.
shows the field enhancement as a function of phase difference δϕ. Complementary behavior for the field enhancement of E and H was observed - as expected from the mode symmetry arguments, by simply controlling the relative phase between the excitation waves (for example, by interferometrically adjusting the relative timing of the two incident pulses). In the case of H-field focusing (δϕ = π), H-field intensities that exceed those of the E-field can only be achieved in a narrow range around δϕ = π. We estimate that the precision / tolerance in phase control (in pulse timing or groove fabrication) that is needed to achieve reasonable isolation (μ|H|2/ε|E|2 ~5) from E - field contaminations, is on the order of +/− π /40 (+/− 10 nm for 780nm), which can readily be achieved with current experimental techniques.

4. Conclusion

In summary, we have compared different excitation strategies and specifically their mode symmetries for adiabatic surface plasmon superfocusing of E- and H-field on metallic NSOM tapers. We found that the NSOM tip essentially acts as an efficient spatial mode filter and that this mode selectivity provides additional functionality when using an interferometrically stabilized double-sided nonlocal SPP excitation scheme. For both the nonlocal grating-coupled SPP excitation method and direct tip apex illumination method, it was possible to enhance or suppress the E-field at the tip apex, by adjusting the relative phase of two SPP excitation waves. Exploiting the mode symmetry further, in relation to the parity reversal between E- and H-field, concentration of H-field and at the same time strong suppression of E-field was achieved for the H-symmetric (or E-antisymmetric) SPP excitation scheme. Compared to E-field superfocusing methods using single-sided or radial-symmetric excitation [12

12. C. Ropers, C. C. Neacsu, T. Elsaesser, M. Albrecht, M. B. Raschke, and C. Lienau, “Grating-coupling of surface plasmons onto metallic tips: a nanoconfined light source,” Nano Lett. 7(9), 2784–2788 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,15

15. F. I. Baida and A. Belkhir, “Superfocusing and light confinement by surface plasmon excitation through radially polarized beam,” Plasmonics 4(1), 51–59 (2009). [CrossRef]

], the proposed double-sided excitation method provides strong field enhancements, and at the same time enables selective addressing of E- or H-field without the need of change for the tip geometry. We believe that our findings will be useful for the high resolution NSOM mapping of optical E- and H-fields around nano-objects.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation (NRF, Global Research Laboratory Project, K20815000003), by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SPP 1391), and in part by a Korea Science and Engineering Foundation (KOSEF, SRC, 2010-0001859) grant for the Center for Subwavelength Optics funded by the Korea government (MEST).

References and links

1.

B. Hecht, B. Sick, U. P. Wild, V. Deckert, R. Zenobi, O. J. F. Martin, and D. W. Pohl, “Scanning near-field optical microscopy with aperture probes: Fundamentals and applications,” J. Chem. Phys. 112(18), 7761–7774 (2000). [CrossRef]

2.

L. Novotny and S. J. Stranick, “Near-field optical microscopy and spectroscopy with pointed probes,” Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 57(1), 303–331 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

3.

Y. Inouye, “Apertureless metallic probes for near-field microscopy,” Top. Appl. Phys. 81, 29–48 (2001). [CrossRef]

4.

J. P. Fillard, Near Field Optics and Nanoscopy (World Scientific, Singapore, 1996).

5.

J. Koglin, U. C. Fischer, and H. Fuchs, “Material contrast in scanning near-field optical microscopy at 1-10 nm resolution,” Phys. Rev. B 55(12), 7977–7984 (1997). [CrossRef]

6.

M. Ashino and M. Ohtsu, “Fabrication and evaluation of a localized plasmon resonance probe for near-field optical microscopy/spectroscopy,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 72(11), 1299–1301 (1998). [CrossRef]

7.

L. Vaccaro, L. Aeschimann, U. Staufer, H. P. Herzig, and R. Dändliker, “Propagation of the electromagnetic field in fully coated near-field optical probes,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 83(3), 584–586 (2003). [CrossRef]

8.

N. A. Janunts, K. S. Baghdasaryan, Kh. V. Nerkararyan, and B. Hecht, “Excitation and superfocusing of surface plasmon polaritons on a silver-coated optical fiber tip,” Opt. Commun. 253(1-3), 118–124 (2005). [CrossRef]

9.

W. Chen and Q. Zhan, “Numerical study of an apertureless near field scanning optical microscope probe under radial polarization illumination,” Opt. Express 15(7), 4106–4111 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

10.

W. Ding, S. R. Andrews, and S. A. Maier, “Internal excitation and superfocusing of surface plasmon polaritons on a silver-coated optical fiber tip,” Phys. Rev. A 75(6), 063822 (2007). [CrossRef]

11.

V. Lotito, U. Sennhauser, and C. Hafner, “Effects of asymmetric surface corrugations on fully metal-coated scanning near field optical microscopy tips,” Opt. Express 18(8), 8722–8734 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

12.

C. Ropers, C. C. Neacsu, T. Elsaesser, M. Albrecht, M. B. Raschke, and C. Lienau, “Grating-coupling of surface plasmons onto metallic tips: a nanoconfined light source,” Nano Lett. 7(9), 2784–2788 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

13.

C. C. Neacsu, S. Berweger, R. L. Olmon, L. V. Saraf, C. Ropers, and M. B. Raschke, “Near-field localization in plasmonic superfocusing: a nanoemitter on a tip,” Nano Lett. 10(2), 592–596 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

14.

D. Sadiq, J. Shirdel, J. S. Lee, E. Selishcheva, N. Park, and C. Lienau, “Adiabatic nanofocusing scattering-type optical nanoscopy of individual gold nanoparticles,” Nano Lett. 11(4), 1609–1613 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

15.

F. I. Baida and A. Belkhir, “Superfocusing and light confinement by surface plasmon excitation through radially polarized beam,” Plasmonics 4(1), 51–59 (2009). [CrossRef]

16.

N. A. Issa and R. Guckenberger, “Optical nanofocusing on tapered metallic waveguides,” Plasmonics 2(1), 31–37 (2007). [CrossRef]

17.

D. K. Gramotnev, M. W. Vogel, and M. I. Stockman, “Optimized nonadiabatic nanofocusing of plasmons by tapered metal rods,’,” J. Appl. Phys. 104(3), 034311 (2008). [CrossRef]

18.

A. L. Demming, F. Festy, and D. Richards, “Plasmon resonances on metal tips: understanding tip-enhanced Raman scattering,” J. Chem. Phys. 122(18), 184716 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

19.

R. M. Roth, N. C. Panoiu, M. M. Adams, R. M. Osgood Jr, C. C. Neacsu, and M. B. Raschke, “Resonant-plasmon field enhancement from asymmetrically illuminated conical metallic-probe tips,” Opt. Express 14(7), 2921–2931 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

20.

C. Ropers, D. R. Solli, C. P. Schulz, C. Lienau, and T. Elsaesser, “Localized multiphoton emission of femtosecond electron pulses from metal nanotips,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98(4), 043907 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

21.

A. J. Babadjanyan, N. L. Margaryan, and Kh. V. Nerkararyan, “Superfocusing of surface polaritons in the conical structure,” J. Appl. Phys. 87(8), 3785–3788 (2000). [CrossRef]

22.

M. I. Stockman, “Nanofocusing of optical energy in tapered plasmonic waveguides,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 93(13), 137404 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

23.

R. Ruppin, “Effect of non-locality on nanofocusing of surface plasmon field intensity in a conical tip,” Phys. Lett. A 340(1-4), 299–302 (2005). [CrossRef]

24.

S. A. Maier, Plasmonics: Fundamentals and Applications (Springer, 2007).

25.

S. Koo, M. S. Kumar, J. Shin, D. S. Kim, and N. K. Park, “Extraordinary magnetic field enhancement with metallic nanowire: role of surface impedance in Babinet’s principle for sub-skin-depth regime,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 103(26), 263901 (2009). [CrossRef]

26.

T. J. Antosiewicz, P. Wróbel, and T. Szoplik, “Magnetic field concentrator for probing optical magnetic metamaterials,” Opt. Express 18(25), 25906–25911 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

27.

I. V. Shadrivov, A. B. Kozyrev, D. W. van der Weide, and Y. S. Kivshar, “Nonlinear magnetic metamaterials,” Opt. Express 16(25), 20266–20271 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

OCIS Codes
(230.3810) Optical devices : Magneto-optic systems
(240.6680) Optics at surfaces : Surface plasmons
(180.4243) Microscopy : Near-field microscopy

ToC Category:
Microscopy

History
Original Manuscript: April 22, 2011
Revised Manuscript: May 28, 2011
Manuscript Accepted: May 31, 2011
Published: June 9, 2011

Citation
Jae Sung Lee, Sanghoon Han, Javid Shirdel, Sukmo Koo, Diyar Sadiq, Christoph Lienau, and Namkyoo Park, "Superfocusing of electric or magnetic fields using conical metal tips: effect of mode symmetry on the plasmon excitation method," Opt. Express 19, 12342-12347 (2011)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-19-13-12342


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. B. Hecht, B. Sick, U. P. Wild, V. Deckert, R. Zenobi, O. J. F. Martin, and D. W. Pohl, “Scanning near-field optical microscopy with aperture probes: Fundamentals and applications,” J. Chem. Phys. 112(18), 7761–7774 (2000). [CrossRef]
  2. L. Novotny and S. J. Stranick, “Near-field optical microscopy and spectroscopy with pointed probes,” Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 57(1), 303–331 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Y. Inouye, “Apertureless metallic probes for near-field microscopy,” Top. Appl. Phys. 81, 29–48 (2001). [CrossRef]
  4. J. P. Fillard, Near Field Optics and Nanoscopy (World Scientific, Singapore, 1996).
  5. J. Koglin, U. C. Fischer, and H. Fuchs, “Material contrast in scanning near-field optical microscopy at 1-10 nm resolution,” Phys. Rev. B 55(12), 7977–7984 (1997). [CrossRef]
  6. M. Ashino and M. Ohtsu, “Fabrication and evaluation of a localized plasmon resonance probe for near-field optical microscopy/spectroscopy,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 72(11), 1299–1301 (1998). [CrossRef]
  7. L. Vaccaro, L. Aeschimann, U. Staufer, H. P. Herzig, and R. Dändliker, “Propagation of the electromagnetic field in fully coated near-field optical probes,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 83(3), 584–586 (2003). [CrossRef]
  8. N. A. Janunts, K. S. Baghdasaryan, Kh. V. Nerkararyan, and B. Hecht, “Excitation and superfocusing of surface plasmon polaritons on a silver-coated optical fiber tip,” Opt. Commun. 253(1-3), 118–124 (2005). [CrossRef]
  9. W. Chen and Q. Zhan, “Numerical study of an apertureless near field scanning optical microscope probe under radial polarization illumination,” Opt. Express 15(7), 4106–4111 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. W. Ding, S. R. Andrews, and S. A. Maier, “Internal excitation and superfocusing of surface plasmon polaritons on a silver-coated optical fiber tip,” Phys. Rev. A 75(6), 063822 (2007). [CrossRef]
  11. V. Lotito, U. Sennhauser, and C. Hafner, “Effects of asymmetric surface corrugations on fully metal-coated scanning near field optical microscopy tips,” Opt. Express 18(8), 8722–8734 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. C. Ropers, C. C. Neacsu, T. Elsaesser, M. Albrecht, M. B. Raschke, and C. Lienau, “Grating-coupling of surface plasmons onto metallic tips: a nanoconfined light source,” Nano Lett. 7(9), 2784–2788 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. C. C. Neacsu, S. Berweger, R. L. Olmon, L. V. Saraf, C. Ropers, and M. B. Raschke, “Near-field localization in plasmonic superfocusing: a nanoemitter on a tip,” Nano Lett. 10(2), 592–596 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. D. Sadiq, J. Shirdel, J. S. Lee, E. Selishcheva, N. Park, and C. Lienau, “Adiabatic nanofocusing scattering-type optical nanoscopy of individual gold nanoparticles,” Nano Lett. 11(4), 1609–1613 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. F. I. Baida and A. Belkhir, “Superfocusing and light confinement by surface plasmon excitation through radially polarized beam,” Plasmonics 4(1), 51–59 (2009). [CrossRef]
  16. N. A. Issa and R. Guckenberger, “Optical nanofocusing on tapered metallic waveguides,” Plasmonics 2(1), 31–37 (2007). [CrossRef]
  17. D. K. Gramotnev, M. W. Vogel, and M. I. Stockman, “Optimized nonadiabatic nanofocusing of plasmons by tapered metal rods,’,” J. Appl. Phys. 104(3), 034311 (2008). [CrossRef]
  18. A. L. Demming, F. Festy, and D. Richards, “Plasmon resonances on metal tips: understanding tip-enhanced Raman scattering,” J. Chem. Phys. 122(18), 184716 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. R. M. Roth, N. C. Panoiu, M. M. Adams, R. M. Osgood, C. C. Neacsu, and M. B. Raschke, “Resonant-plasmon field enhancement from asymmetrically illuminated conical metallic-probe tips,” Opt. Express 14(7), 2921–2931 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. C. Ropers, D. R. Solli, C. P. Schulz, C. Lienau, and T. Elsaesser, “Localized multiphoton emission of femtosecond electron pulses from metal nanotips,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98(4), 043907 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. A. J. Babadjanyan, N. L. Margaryan, and Kh. V. Nerkararyan, “Superfocusing of surface polaritons in the conical structure,” J. Appl. Phys. 87(8), 3785–3788 (2000). [CrossRef]
  22. M. I. Stockman, “Nanofocusing of optical energy in tapered plasmonic waveguides,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 93(13), 137404 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. R. Ruppin, “Effect of non-locality on nanofocusing of surface plasmon field intensity in a conical tip,” Phys. Lett. A 340(1-4), 299–302 (2005). [CrossRef]
  24. S. A. Maier, Plasmonics: Fundamentals and Applications (Springer, 2007).
  25. S. Koo, M. S. Kumar, J. Shin, D. S. Kim, and N. K. Park, “Extraordinary magnetic field enhancement with metallic nanowire: role of surface impedance in Babinet’s principle for sub-skin-depth regime,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 103(26), 263901 (2009). [CrossRef]
  26. T. J. Antosiewicz, P. Wróbel, and T. Szoplik, “Magnetic field concentrator for probing optical magnetic metamaterials,” Opt. Express 18(25), 25906–25911 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. I. V. Shadrivov, A. B. Kozyrev, D. W. van der Weide, and Y. S. Kivshar, “Nonlinear magnetic metamaterials,” Opt. Express 16(25), 20266–20271 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

Figures

Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Fig. 3
 
Fig. 4 Fig. 5
 

Supplementary Material


» Media 1: AVI (3793 KB)     
» Media 2: AVI (3392 KB)     
» Media 3: AVI (3438 KB)     
» Media 4: AVI (3316 KB)     

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited